There
is a fundamental problem that Abbot seems not to appreciate when it
is said:

This is a fatal error simply because gravitational-waves are not the orbital frequency.

The orbital frequency has everything to do with the system
being a binary. There would be no orbital frequency if it was a single
object. Yet a single object is still supposed to emit gravitational-waves according to Hawking/Einstein where it replaces Newton’s
instant gravity. It is appalling philosophy to confuse the orbital
frequency of a binary system with a theory on the velocity of gravity. .

I deliberately make a sharp semantic distinction between the term
from Einstein of ‘gravitational-wave’, and the term ‘gravity
wave-form of the orbit’. These terms are utterly different aspects
of the theoretical physics and the math.

To explain
further why this distinction is so vital to this analysis, I first
need to describe the ‘gravity wave-form of the orbit’
(not gravitational-waves) of a much simpler purely Newtonian example.

The software (orbit-gravity-sim-11.exe or OGS11)
demonstrates the relationship between the orbital frequency and the
gravity wave-form in real-time. This can be observed in the evolutionary
algorithm by selecting scenario [4].

As the
pair orbit one another anti-clockwise, their combined gravity pulls
towards an observer at the bottom of the screen. In the graphs to
follow, the wave-forms at the bottom thus move from left to right:

Scenario
[4] depicts a binary pair with unequal
masses. The red graph-line is the sum total of the gravity of the
binary pair pulling downwards towards the respective observers at
O1, and O2.

It can
be seen that at the time t2 where the pair are horizontal, the pull
is weaker than at the time t1 where the pair are vertical. At t2 the
pull is less towards the observer O2 whereas at t1 the observer O1
experiences more gravity by comparison. So when the pair rotates,
the graph oscillates with the pull of gravity in a regular wave-shape
as viewed by the observers.

Nonetheless,
this is all purely to demonstrate that the gravity wave-form of the
orbit for the binary pair is quite different to the theory of gravitational-waves. It would be very easy to mistakenly conflate the observed data
of the ‘gravity wave-form of the orbit’ of the binary
pair with the concept of ‘gravitational-wave’ because
of semantic similarities in terminology.

The
wave-form in the observed LIGO data, still only represents the shape
that is the result of the combined pull of gravity by the binary pair
in orbit around each other. That shape is not the actual ‘gravitational-wave’ from General Relativity. The graphs previously are of
course Newtonian, and are not directly related to General Relativity
or gravitational-waves..

But
the observed data of the gravity of the pair in GW150914 causes quite
a different shape to this.

So obviously
there is something quite different happening with the LIGO observation.
Abbot also demonstrates the merger process like this:

The
above diagram shows that the wave-form is a result of the orbits of
the binary system. So we can clearly see that it appears as though
a purely Newtonian dynamic is insufficient to describe the in-spiral
and Ringdown. In the observed data we have an increase in amplitude
before it flattens.

But
also note the discrepancy in the two official LIGO wave-forms from
Abbott. Their second graph (theoretical) begins with amplitudes far
higher than the first graph. The first graph (observed) is far flatter
to begin with. This is quite a marked difference which shows that
Abbot’s theoretical account for the observation does not quite
fit the data…